Virtual Library

Start Your Search

Y. Kai



Author of

  • +

    P1.02 - Biology/Pathology (ID 614)

    • Event: WCLC 2017
    • Type: Poster Session with Presenters Present
    • Track: Biology/Pathology
    • Presentations: 1
    • +

      P1.02-002 - Diagnostic Utility of MUC4 Expression to Differentiate Epithelioid Mesothelioma from Lung Adenocarcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma (ID 8372)

      09:30 - 16:00  |  Author(s): Y. Kai

      • Abstract
      • Slides

      Background:
      Malignant mesothelioma is a highly aggressive asbestos related cancer with poor prognosis and its diagnosis and differentiatiation from various cancers is challenging. In addition to histological features, many positive and negative immunohisotchemical markers are needed to differentiate epitheioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma and/or squamous cell carcinoma. The positive mesothelial markers calretinin, WT-1, D2-40, CK5/6; positive lung adenocarcinoma markers, TTF-1, Napsin-A, Claudin-4, CEA; and positive squamous cell markers, P40, P63, CK5/6, MOC31 are routinely used. However, these markers are not sufficient and novel markers have to be identified.

      Method:
      Patients and Histologic Samples Pathological specimens (formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue blocks) of 65 epithelioid mesothelioma and 60 lung adenocarcinoma and 57 squamous cell carcinoma were obtained from the archives of the Department of Pathology, Hiroshima University. All histological sections were reviewed and reclassified according to recent 2015 WHO classification and was confirmed by histologic findings and an immunohistochemical marker panel recommended by 2012 IMIG update to practical guidelines Immunohistochemical Procedures and Evaluation of Expression of MUC4 Immunohistochemical staining was performed using the Ventana Benchmark GX automated immunohistochemical station (Roche Diagnostics, Tokyo, Japan). Cells showing nuclear staining for calretinin, WT1, p40, p63, and TTF-1, cytoplasmic staining for MUC4 and napsin A, membranous staining for D2-40, MOC-31, and claudin-4 or membranous and/or cytoplasmic staining for CK5/6 and CEA were regarded as ‘positive’. Positive Immunoreactivity was semiquantified scored from 0 to 3+.

      Result:
      MUC4 positivity was present in 50/60(83.3%) cases, case of adenocarcinoma and 50/56(89.3%) cases of squamous cell carcinoma but none of 65 epithelioid mesotheliomas (0%). Among lung adenocarcinoma cases, 21 cases showed score 3+, 9 cases 2+ and 20 cases score +1. In lung squamous cell carcinoma, 21 cases score 3+, 10 cases score 2+ and 19 cases score 1+. The sensitivity and specificity of MUC4 to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma were 100% and 83.3% respectively with accuracy rate of 92%. Similarly, sensitivity and specificity of MUC4 to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma from lung squamous cell carcinoma 100% and 89.3% respectively with accuracy rate of 95%. MUC4 expression showed sensitivity of 100%, but lower specificity of 86.2% and accuracy rate of 91.2% than CEA or Claudin-4 expression. However, it showed better sensitivity, specificity and accuracy rate than that of MOC-31.

      Conclusion:
      MUC4 is an additional negative immunohistochemical marker to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma and/or squamous cell carcinoma.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.